your mission - should you choose to accept: ideas for raising guitar off the floor for pictures...

[mistermikev]

didn't want to be the annoying guy continually bringing his thread to the top of members build area with little to no new content... just meanderings on photo stuff, so thought I'd start a thread.  

In the interest of getting a better photo I'd like to try to physically raise the guitar off the floor away from the background.  I've been thinking about how I might accomplish and what sort of jig/apperatus would do that without any risk to the guitar.  

 

option 1: hang the guitar with 100lbs test line in front of a background instead of on the floor - I don't like this idea for a few reasons:

     a) I feel like I really want natural sunlight as much as possible and hanging a backdrop would make it problematic given the area where I have to take photos.

     b)just a matter of time before it gets wacked by something or falls.  

 

option 2: some sort of jig that could raise my guitar off the floor.  a number of challenges with that

     2a requirement: it needs to be 'hidden' behind the guitar so I don't have to worry too much about getting it in the photo.

     2b requirement: it needs to be balanced.  I don't want to just use a pillow or piece of foam because i don't want it falling over or moving around while shooting

     2c requirement: not damage the finish.  fairly obvious but anything that would even remotley scratch or damage would be off limits

     2d requiement: need to be able to flip the guitar to shoot the back.  given my guitars and propensity to do radius tops/backs... might have to be something where I can flip it and get convex vs concave.  perhaps a static base... and then rails that are cut in a radius... could detach and re-attach upside down to hold the front?

 

option 3: ??? ideas

you guys are always good at stirring the stew so... if you have any ideas I would really appreciate them.

 

[curtisa]

I assume you mean you want the guitar to appear floating off the floor as if held by a piece of string from the headstock? I'm not entirely sure how that would be done by the pro's unless they use clear fishing line, specialist lighting tricks, a bit of Photoshop to hide the evidence or a combination of the three.

If you mean how to raise the guitar off the floor while it's lying on its back, in the past I've just used a small, thick book to prop it up underneath the body and been careful to position it so that it wasn't visible in shot. Using non-reflective, dark backgrounds may also help disguise that the guitar is also not in contact with it when in fact it is actually (at least partially) resting on it.

Maybe take a look at Google images for some ideas? I notice that a lot of artsy guitar shots actually take advantage of the fact that the guitar needs to lean against something in order to stay upright - a tree, barn door, old leather chair, car bumper etc. It tends to be the big name companies that go for the 'floating in space' look, which I'm willing to bet are largely created using judicious amounts of photo post-processing to erase any props, cradles and jigs after the shot was taken. They'd have the budget to expend on that kind of thing, so in their case there's probably no reason not to take advantage of it.

[mistermikev]

22 minutes ago, curtisa said:

I assume you mean you want the guitar to appear floating off the floor as if held by a piece of string from the headstock? I'm not entirely sure how that would be done by the pro's unless they use clear fishing line, specialist lighting tricks, a bit of Photoshop to hide the evidence or a combination of the three.

If you mean how to raise the guitar off the floor while it's lying on its back, in the past I've just used a small, thick book to prop it up underneath the body and been careful to position it so that it wasn't visible in shot. Using non-reflective, dark backgrounds may also help disguise that the guitar is also not in contact with it when in fact it is actually (at least partially) resting on it.

Maybe take a look at Google images for some ideas? I notice that a lot of artsy guitar shots actually take advantage of the fact that the guitar needs to lean against something in order to stay upright - a tree, barn door, old leather chair, car bumper etc. It tends to be the big name companies that go for the 'floating in space' look, which I'm willing to bet are largely created using judicious amounts of photo post-processing to erase any props, cradles and jigs after the shot was taken. They'd have the budget to expend on that kind of thing, so in their case there's probably no reason not to take advantage of it.

yes, option one would be just tye some 100 lb test around the tuners or something... hang it from the ceiling and photoshop it after.

option 2 is what I really want.  book?  please elaborate - never heard of em hehe!  that's a pretty good idea.  perhaps I'm over thinking it... then again it would only be making contact at 4 points given my radius back.  

the lean trick... that does make for a nice shot but one can only get so much mileage out of it.  Further you have to have something photogenic to lean against.  I will take that advice and do a shot or two next time like that so good call. 

that said, I really like to shoot with the guitar on the floor so I can get a bunch of angles.

I agree on the photoshop after... but man - that takes so much time for me.  was thinking maybe getting some 2" foam from home depot and making two forms... that have a radius.  maybe make them small enough to hide under the guitar?

thank you for the reply... as usual proj gtr comes thru... you have me thinking... thanks for that.

[curtisa]

Don't get me wrong - I wasn't suggesting you should Photoshop it up, just noting that it's possible that's how it is done where money and time is no object. I personally can't be bothered with Photoshopping to fix/hide things in most of my shots; only when there is something badly wrong in an otherwise good pic.

Another thing I've experimented with in the past is laying a black cotton sheet over the sofa and resting the guitar lengthways along the seat, so that it 'stands up' in the playing orientation. If the sheet is black and matte enough it doesn't tend to be so apparent that the guitar is resting on a soft surface.

[mistermikev]

2 minutes ago, curtisa said:

Don't get me wrong - I wasn't suggesting you should Photoshop it up, just noting that it's possible that's how it is done where money and time is no object. I personally can't be bothered with Photoshopping to fix/hide things in most of my shots; only when there is something badly wrong in an otherwise good pic.

Another thing I've experimented with in the past is laying a black cotton sheet over the sofa and resting the guitar lengthways along the seat, so that it 'stands up' in the playing orientation. If the sheet is black and matte enough it doesn't tend to be so apparent that the guitar is resting on a soft surface.

right on.  I usually will just to a little bit in terms of cropping and maybe rotation... very seldom a little bit of reduction in brightness or the 'auto tone' feature but that's it.  Pretty minimal but given I take 150 shots to get 8 that I like and then end up cropping 70% of those and rotating 40%... just takes way too much time!

couch - that is a very good call.  Im def gonna try that one!  

Another thing I was thinking is if I could find a bigger "shooters bag".  they make these silicon gun rests that are great for a neck caul... if I could find one about 2" x 8" x 15" that'd be ideal but seems unlikely.  

I guess if I bought a piece of plexiglass big enough... heat bend it into a square but with a radius top... then glue cork to the top... but that'd only be good for one side.  would be pretty well hidden.  

[mistermikev]

or perhaps something simpler... just a piece of plexi glass at either end that can hook onto the strap pins.  

[curtisa]

Pic on the couch with black sheet underneath/behind:

[mistermikev]

2 minutes ago, curtisa said:

Pic on the couch with black sheet underneath/behind:

wow, that's a hella beautiful build and idk how you got the background so invisible???  do tell.

[Bizman62]

4 hours ago, mistermikev said:

it would only be making contact at 4 points given my radius back.  

Try to make it a three point supporting thing, that would make balancing the guitar easier. A double sided tripod i.e. three rods tied together from the middle with some kind of an individually adjustable clamp, perhaps?

What @curtisa said about the background is crucial: "Using non-reflective, dark backgrounds may also help disguise that the guitar is also not in contact with it when in fact it is actually (at least partially) resting on it." and "If the sheet is black and matte enough it doesn't tend to be so apparent that the guitar is resting on a soft surface."

You may have seen photos of studios where they have the background continue on the floor in a large curve. That's for hiding shadows. Bitumen paper might be an inexpensive choice. They also use light from several angles for the same reason. One from front up and two lesser from the sides is a good start. A diffusor such as a thin white fabric or even baking paper can be useful in hiding reflections, just don't let the light bulbs burn the material! Green screen video tutorials may give you some hints, there's tons of those.

For inspiration, look at My Twangy Guitar videos. That guy knows how to hide the background!

Summarized: Matte black background without wrinkles and edges that might cast extra shadows, three point lighting and perfect focus on the object instead of the background.

[curtisa]

4 hours ago, mistermikev said:

wow, that's a hella beautiful build and idk how you got the background so invisible???  do tell.

Thankyou. The black fabric gets it 90% there. The last 10% is to use a colour curve intensity filter that pushes the black tones further back. That particular photo has a bit too much of an orange cast to it, but the 'invisibility' of the background seems to have worked OK. I just visited a fabric/craft supplies store and bought a few metres of black cotton on a roll about 6ft wide. Maybe $20 all up?    

[mistermikev]

2 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

Try to make it a three point supporting thing, that would make balancing the guitar easier. A double sided tripod i.e. three rods tied together from the middle with some kind of an individually adjustable clamp, perhaps?

What @curtisa said about the background is crucial: "Using non-reflective, dark backgrounds may also help disguise that the guitar is also not in contact with it when in fact it is actually (at least partially) resting on it." and "If the sheet is black and matte enough it doesn't tend to be so apparent that the guitar is resting on a soft surface."

You may have seen photos of studios where they have the background continue on the floor in a large curve. That's for hiding shadows. Bitumen paper might be an inexpensive choice. They also use light from several angles for the same reason. One from front up and two lesser from the sides is a good start. A diffusor such as a thin white fabric or even baking paper can be useful in hiding reflections, just don't let the light bulbs burn the material! Green screen video tutorials may give you some hints, there's tons of those.

For inspiration, look at My Twangy Guitar videos. That guy knows how to hide the background!

Summarized: Matte black background without wrinkles and edges that might cast extra shadows, three point lighting and perfect focus on the object instead of the background.

thanks biz - very much appreciate the reply.  non relfective - good advice.  I think I can by some 'fleece' from walmart that might be good or perhaps if I can find some 'felt' or perhaps even better just buy an actual backdrop from amazon.  

I have use at least 3 light sources on all my photos so far.  usually my two light panels and an overhead light.  I did take off my diffusers for this series so perhaps I should go back to those - I modified them so they'd stay on better - did some sewing the other night lol!  Perhaps I should get some diffusion for the overheads.

wow, mr twangy - subscribed - that is awesome... just two arms floating out there and just my style of music!  vcool.

def going to try some manual focus - in fact I think I was using that on my last guitar photoshoot.  

thanks again for the input.

[mistermikev]

2 hours ago, curtisa said:

Thankyou. The black fabric gets it 90% there. The last 10% is to use a colour curve intensity filter that pushes the black tones further back. That particular photo has a bit too much of an orange cast to it, but the 'invisibility' of the background seems to have worked OK. I just visited a fabric/craft supplies store and bought a few metres of black cotton on a roll about 6ft wide. Maybe $20 all up?    

right on.  that is a really cool photo.  very much appreciate you sharing the details.  I am going to go see what is avail on amazon!  thanks again!

[ScottR]

9 hours ago, mistermikev said:

was thinking maybe getting some 2" foam

That is what I use when I shoot it over a hard rough surface. get several and just place them far enough from the edge to not show. They can be stacked to account for curvature and can pretty much be trimmed into any shape with scissors....and often come in black.

SR

[mistermikev]

15 minutes ago, ScottR said:

That is what I use when I shoot it over a hard rough surface. get several and just place them far enough from the edge to not show. They can be stacked to account for curvature and can pretty much be trimmed into any shape with scissors....and often come in black.

SR

thank you scott... if you wouldn't mind please elab on the foam you use.  I was just thinking home depot pink insullation... where do you find black foam?

[mistermikev]

btw just ordered a muslin background so... thank you guys for the suggestions will try that and see how it goes!!

[mistermikev]

now that I think about it... I have a 5" memory foam mattress that we bought but hate... it's sitting in the spare bedroom.  I could cut a piece and dye it... or perhaps do some more sewing and make a "black pillow" out of it.  perhaps even sculpt it a bit.

[ScottR]

2 hours ago, mistermikev said:

thank you scott... if you wouldn't mind please elab on the foam you use.  I was just thinking home depot pink insullation... where do you find black foam?

First I used these bench cookies....

https://www.rockler.com/rockler-bench-cookie-plus-work-gripper-single

Then I just used some foam from work that toy trucks (don't ask) were packed in. It was dark grey in color.

I guess the color matters little, since the goal is for the supports to not be in the shot.

SR

[mistermikev]

1 hour ago, ScottR said:

First I used these bench cookies....

https://www.rockler.com/rockler-bench-cookie-plus-work-gripper-single

Then I just used some foam from work that toy trucks (don't ask) were packed in. It was dark grey in color.

I guess the color matters little, since the goal is for the supports to not be in the shot.

SR

you sir, are amazing.  I now have a reason to go to rockler.  The one by me has killer birdseye for $5/bdft.  You have not only answered my question but enabled me to indulge my addiction for wood I don't need... and for that - I thank you!!

bench cookies... sounds delicious.  how do they taste?  I assume you eat these and then rest the guitar on your extended belly and take photos?  Can't wait to try it lol!!

[ScottR]

I like the double chocolate chip ones the best.

SR

[mistermikev]

9 minutes ago, ScottR said:

I like the double chocolate chip ones the best.

SR

nom nom nom nom... lol!

[mistermikev]

so... got my muslin sheet... put my diffusers on my light panels... looked up how to focus in manual mode on my camera and just tried to learn a few things from taking some shots.  Thought I'd share the guitar porn here.  I think there are def shots that show improvement... but also some blurry shots in there.  have a tripod on the way so hoping that will take me the rest of the way there.  I think I was using too much light from the panels here so next time going to try to set that halfway.

would love any comments, general reactions, advice on what is working and what is not.  

thanks!

in case you wanna here a story... the hamer steve stevens I - I bought this somewhere around 1988.  It was a few years old at that point.  I took it with me to MIT in L.A. and was in the 1995 Northridge quake there.  It was sitting in front of a Laney 1/2 stack... and due to the thunerous earthquake (I lived in burbank at the time) the half stack rocked forward and launched the head onto the neck of this guitar.  Was just splinters and it was actually my only guitar at the time.  I was crushed.  I bought another guitar at the time but just couldn't bear to do anything with this so it sat in a case for about 3 or 4 years.  A few years later I was working at a cabinet shop outside milwaukee wi and figured I had the right stuff to try to fix it.  the headstock was not completely snapped off... hanging on by threads.  I decided the best thing to do was to hang it upside down, spread the cracks as much as  possible... pour glue in and use a compressor to shoot that glue up into the crevases.  That fix held for about 3 or 4 years and it broke again.  I chalked this up to some dry spots.  Again, hung on to the guitar through a few moves and in 2014 or 15 I took a deep breath... grabbed the headstock and ripped it the rest of the way off.  then scraped any glue residue off the shards, made a bondo caul and some clamps using plexiglass and lag bolts... and glued her back together.  I figured it would need some reinforcement just in case... so I sanded the face of the headstock flat and glued on a 1/8 overlay of mahog.  Pieced together the logo from a number of old photos of similar guitars, and did a waterslide.  The original color was white, which had been beaten and faded to "smokers-tooth-yellow" so I stripped it all down and used red and black dye to get the finish you see below.  anywho... I'll shut up now.

below... is just my jem.  1989 Ibanez Jem 77 FP.  all original... has a few minor dings around the perimeter and the typical faded pink pickups and stress cracks on the back of the neck.  For me... this is the gold standard afa shredder guitars go.  neck is paper thin but never needs adjustment.  Plays super fast... sounds a bit weak in the beaf department for metal with the PAF Pros/basswood body/thick-ass-finish... but plug this into any clean amp and instantly sounds like "sisters".  

 

[curtisa]

The black muslin looks better than the basket-weave pattern you used on your blue Tele. My thoughts:

• The eye tends to get drawn to the highlights created in the backing sheet where it's been creased while sitting folded up. The organic, crumpled look is fine if that's what you're going for, but the 'shirt just removed from the packet' look might not be. First three shots of the Hamer show it off the most. You could always deliberately over-crumple the muslin to make it obvious that the background is meant to be a bit of a soft feature in the shot, like the guitar is resting on a sea of fabric. Trying to stretch it taut but accidentally leaving creases in it is problematic, as it tends to look a bit staged. The Jem shots are better in this intance.
• Strong shadowing on the background suggests you need more indirect or diffuse light when taking the shots. Try aiming the lighting panels to the ceiling rather than pointing them at the guitar, so that the light is diffusely reflected off the white ceiling paint rather than blasting at full intensity towards the instrument. Paradoxically, I actually think the lighting in some of the Tele shots was slightly better, as there's some natural darkening to the left/right edges of the frame that adds some character to the pictures:

  

• The composition of Hamer #3 is a bit odd with the strap occupying a good third of the image, pushing the guitar too far to the right. The issue also gets amplified by the narrow cropping applied to the top and bottom of the image. Don't be afraid to use more of the native 16:9 or 4:3 aspect ratio of the camera. That can mean angling the shot so that the guitar fits diagonally from corner to corner to minimse the amount of apparent dead space around the instrument, such as the 2nd Hamer and 2nd Jem pics. Guitars are notoriously long and skinny objects to photograph, so you may as well try to position them so that they use as much of the viewport as possible.
• There's some overblowing of the whites going on in some of the shots (the 4th Hamer pic of the headstock, 1st Jem pic etc), which results in loss of detail on the brighter parts of the instrument. Maybe also another clue that there's still a bit too much bright/direct lighting, or maybe the camera has some kind of autoexposure correction feature that needs to be turned off? Some dialling back of the contrast using image manipulation after the fact can help tame it a bit, but if you can control it at the source it will make your life easier.
• The angled shots looking down the neck (Hamer #5, Jem #3) make for more interesting staging than the square-on shots, but because the focus is on the headstock in the foreground the camera's depth of field needs to be much greater to ensure the body towards the back remains (more) in focus. It can be a deliberate choice to force focus on a feature on a guitar up close and leave the rest of it blurry, but care needs to be taken to ensure it looks like a deliberate choice. The depth-of-field blur effect may be slightly easier to control if you take a few steps back from the guitar and use the optical zoom to get back in close again. I'm pretty sure that's how I got this one:

  

• Don't be afraid to use some really up close and personal angles with odd positions. Guitars have all sorts of interesting features to catch the eye. One or two square-on shots are fine if you want to give the viewer an idea of what the instrument looks like, but there's so much more you can do to convey to the viewer how it feels:

  

  

• Use a tripod wherever you can. Yes, it's clunky, takes longer to set up and gets in the way all the time, but it guarantees your shots will be motion blur-free. I'll even go to the trouble of setting up the delay timer on the camera so my hands are nowhere near the shutter when it goes off. This can be even more important if your lighting situation forces you to use long exposure times or low ISO settings, where the camera must remain motionless when taking the shot. If your camera allows for it use the preview screen's zoom function before every shot to blow up the image as much as possible to set the manual focus to ensure it's as crisp as you can make it.
• Watch out for dust specs and pet hair on the black muslin. Black tends to show it up really easily, especially in the close-up shots. Keep one of those magic lint brushes handy or invest some time in Photoshop to airbrush them out afterwards.

[mistermikev]

14 minutes ago, curtisa said:

The black muslin looks better than the basket-weave pattern you used on your blue Tele. My thoughts:

• The eye tends to get drawn to the highlights created in the backing sheet where it's been creased while sitting folded up. The organic, crumpled look is fine if that's what you're going for, but the 'shirt just removed from the packet' look might not be. First three shots of the Hamer show it off the most. You could always deliberately over-crumple the muslin to make it obvious that the background is meant to be a bit of a soft feature in the shot, like the guitar is resting on a sea of fabric. Trying to stretch it taut but accidentally leaving creases in it is problematic, as it tends to look a bit staged. The Jem shots are better in this intance.
• Strong shadowing on the background suggests you need more indirect or diffuse light when taking the shots. Try aiming the lighting panels to the ceiling rather than pointing them at the guitar, so that the light is diffusely reflected off the white ceiling paint rather than blasting at full intensity towards the instrument. Paradoxically, I actually think the lighting in some of the Tele shots was slightly better, as there's some natural darkening to the left/right edges of the frame that adds some character to the pictures:

  

• The composition of Hamer #3 is a bit odd with the strap occupying a good third of the image, pushing the guitar too far to the right. The issue also gets amplified by the narrow cropping applied to the top and bottom of the image. Don't be afraid to use more of the native 16:9 or 4:3 aspect ratio of the camera. That can mean angling the shot so that the guitar fits diagonally from corner to corner to minimse the amount of apparent dead space around the instrument, such as the 2nd Hamer and 2nd Jem pics. Guitars are notoriously long and skinny objects to photograph, so you may as well try to position them so that they use as much of the viewport as possible.
• There's some overblowing of the whites going on in some of the shots (the 4th Hamer pic of the headstock, 1st Jem pic etc), which results in loss of detail on the brighter parts of the instrument. Maybe also another clue that there's still a bit too much bright/direct lighting, or maybe the camera has some kind of autoexposure correction feature that needs to be turned off? Some dialling back of the contrast using image manipulation after the fact can help tame it a bit, but if you can control it at the source it will make your life easier.
• The angled shots looking down the neck (Hamer #5, Jem #3) make for more interesting staging than the square-on shots, but because the focus is on the headstock in the foreground the camera's depth of field needs to be much greater to ensure the body towards the back remains (more) in focus. It can be a deliberate choice to force focus on a feature on a guitar up close and leave the rest of it blurry, but care needs to be taken to ensure it looks like a deliberate choice. The depth-of-field blur effect may be slightly easier to control if you take a few steps back from the guitar and use the optical zoom to get back in close again. I'm pretty sure that's how I got this one:

  

• Don't be afraid to use some really up close and personal angles with odd positions. Guitars have all sorts of interesting features to catch the eye. One or two square-on shots are fine if you want to give the viewer an idea of what the instrument looks like, but there's so much more you can do to convey to the viewer how it feels:

  

  

• Use a tripod wherever you can. Yes, it's clunky, takes longer to set up and gets in the way all the time, but it guarantees your shots will be motion blur-free. I'll even go to the trouble of setting up the delay timer on the camera so my hands are nowhere near the shutter when it goes off. This can be even more important if your lighting situation forces you to use long exposure times or low ISO settings, where the camera must remain motionless when taking the shot. If your camera allows for it use the preview screen's zoom function before every shot to blow up the image as much as possible to set the manual focus to ensure it's as crisp as you can make it.
• Watch out for dust specs and pet hair on the black muslin. Black tends to show it up really easily, especially in the close-up shots. Keep one of those magic lint brushes handy or invest some time in Photoshop to airbrush them out afterwards.

so much info here... I'm so thankful for that... and then so many lovely guitar pics there!  wow, you are fantastic... we should see more of your builds (what's up w that?)

so... very good info on the background.  I kind of hap hazzardly put that muslin over the couch to try to mimic your shot thinking I'd be able to make it invisible later... but when I tried that by just darkening it... was not near enough... I suspect with less direct light that would be more likley so will shoot for that.  I think also if I had just laid it on the floore I could have straightened it out better.  drawing my attention to how much that sticks out to you is very helpful feedback.  

aspect... I freq want to leave more background in the shot... but then it's hard to see details of the guitar so freq end up cropping them.  one thing I'm just starting to get into... and that you do very well in your shots... is to forget the idea that you have to get the whole guitar in the shot.  some of those shots where it's just a hint of the guitar are the best.  really great shots that show a lot of detail.  going to try to emulate you there... and take more of those but then also do a few full shots too.

the blurry body vs headstock - well... I've been guilty of using the lcd to see my shots and that is not the best.  I should probably use the view finder more.  totally unintentional.  need to see better when I'm taking photos... perhaps the view finder will do that.

overblown white - yup... that's a sore thumb when I look at them.  have to work that out a bit better.  I think because I'm not used to shooting on the couch my game was a bit more off than usual.  more practice is needed for sure.  

delay timer - yes this is something I've been thinking about.  I actually have a remote button, and my new tripod came with a wireless remote too so... will def do that - good advice.

good call on the lint - i have 3 cats and one dog... gonna be hard but def need to keep that in mind as I'm shooting!!

thank you so much for the schooling - really can't thank you enough!!

 

[curtisa]

1 hour ago, mistermikev said:

I kind of hap hazzardly put that muslin over the couch to try to mimic your shot thinking I'd be able to make it invisible later.

FWIW, that same shot before and after:

So while the black background is mostly black-ish, it's still a fairly clean base to work with; no wrinkles, no fluff, no creases. There's a slight puckering visible where the lower horn is resting against the sofa seat, and a little at the top of the image above the upper waist of the body. But these get largely hidden with a little use of some contrast reduction after the shot is taken. You can see the underside of the roll of fabric at the extreme top of the original shot which was resting on top of the couch at the time and the whole thing is a little crooked, but these can be corrected later on by cropping and rotating respectively. The slight orange cast is still present in the orgininal shot and I really should have corrected this at the time, but I got lazy. I don't have any lights in use, just natural daylight filtered through the window blinds in the house which probably accounts for the orange tinge.

1 hour ago, mistermikev said:

I think also if I had just laid it on the floore I could have straightened it out better

That's probably not such a bad idea if you're really wanting to do that 'dead-on' full instrument shot. If you can devise some way of shooting the guitar from above looking straight down with minimal shadows you'd probably get that 'guitar floating in inky black space' look with minimal fuss and no risk of the guitar falling from a some kind of jig or suspended thread. Just don't drop the camera

[Bizman62]

@curtisa already pretty much pointed out what I might have said, and a bit more. Creases in the background, direction of light etc.

What still puzzles me is that the focus still seems to be more on the backing fabric than on the actual guitar.

You said that there seems to be too much light. You can tame that down by shortening the exposure time and tightening the aperture. That will also somewhat help with focusing as the depth  of field will increase.

Here's how the exposure time works, taken against my office chair with only the light behind me on the ceiling. The aperture is f3.4 and the exposure times 1/30, 1/10, 1/4, 1/3, 1/2, and 1 seconds, supporting the camera on the hand rest. I was using a Canon Power Shot SX200IS which is a simple pocket size super zoom type camera, with the ISO value set to 200:

 

And here's how the aperture size works, all having been exposed for one second. The apertures used were 3,4, 5 and 8:

 

And finally one taken with the flash where you can clearly see the fabric. It didn't make much difference whether between 1/30, 1/250 and 1/500 seconds as the flash was so powerful to the close distance of about one foot.